Has there ever existed a truly evil figure in history?

>Has there ever existed a truly evil figure in history?

Gilles de Rais
a companion-in-arms of Joan of Arc
he raped and murdered 140 children

God spoke to Joan
the Devil had chosen one companion close to her

wasn't this guy's confession obtained trough extreme torture even for the period though?

Reinhard Heydrich. Architect of the Holocaust. You have to be pretty evil to mechanize the elimination of millions of people.

The best part is, the man had no noted examples of genuine antisemitism. The man did it because it was asked of him and he saw it as just another step along his career path.

>tfw big brother orchestrated the Holocaust while you tried to save Jews.

Not true. For Germany he was anything but.

He certainly ok'd evil actions, but from his perspective they were warranted evil actions.

He wasn't evil, just devoid of emotion towards certain people.

Maybe that Chinese usurper at the end of the Ming dinasty who killed literally everyone around.
But that could have been greatly exaggerate too, chinks love to make shit up

He liked dogs and art.

Jeffery Dahmer said he was evil. He insisted that he was the living embodiment of Satan.

...

The madman Sam Hyde!

Don't forget Lenin, Trotsky, and Marx, commie. ;)

He was mentally ill.

>god spoke to her

Joan of Arc was just a cheerleader sucking the dicks of Frenchmen.

I say this as an unbiased historian. No bias, whatsoever!

...

>when your only true friend is the devil
I feel bad for this man.

Literally who?

So he's not a person? You just said "No person ever considered himself evil."
I'm pretty sure that anyone who did a bunch of horrible shit and then proclaimed that they were evil would be considered mentally ill no matter what.

That's what enables evil to begin with

Yes, but what he did was to him ''good,'' he took pleasure from it or whatever. He can say what he wants, but he can never truly consider himself evil. Evil can only be applied to an external thing; something that you don't like, for whatever reason, usually malevolent things that could harm or hinder you.

[Citation Needed]

Nice argument m8

>Has there ever existed a truly evil figure in history?
He really fucked everything up.

Get off of this website.

Marx sucks huge fucking dick. I'm very happy that when he was alive, Stirner trolled him with his individual egoist philosophy.

>make a claim and provide no evidence
>comment on the quality of other peopls arguments

Fuck off newfag

Gook moot

I don't like your question because it's so broad.
In order to approach this question we'd have to have a philosophical debate to define "truly evil,' as well as quantify/qualify what evil is. And then we'd have to debate over whether certain people meet those criteria.

so, like. whatever im just gonna go spend my time in other threads.

Not really, he believed he was saving the world in his own way.
What OP is asking is a "true evil" historical figure, someone who did harm, knew he was doing harm and knew that what he was doing was wrong.
A psychopath, not even suicide bombers fit this profile.

Welcome to Veeky Forums.org! Please make sure you have read the Rules and FAQ before posting any further! Have fun!

He's a hero

he's obviously a homosexual and i guarantee you that he feels bad for creating such a racist website but that's because he ignores the benefits and pros of this "place"

It's highly self evident. Unless you are under the influence of some ideology or have a poor understanding of human psychology, I don't see how you could disagree. But I would still like to hear some reasonable argument from you.

you

youtube.com/watch?v=WWFaG_7RySI

No, you shouldn't.

The shit he did no normal person should ever pity that man.

Enabling and being evil are different. Accepting gay culture enables homosexuality, but it doesn't make you gay.

Christian the Tyrant

Pol Pot ran on something higher than moon logic. He burned moon logic as fuel

English propaganda.

Killing your enemies is kind of the point of war. Don't hate the player. Hate the game.

You're the newfriend here.

Albert Fish did some fucked up shit

George Soros

Absolutely wrong. The point of war is to defeat the enemy, not to kill him. You can defeat an enemy without killing him, e.g. by convincing him that any further resistance is moot.

...

name one thing George Soros actually did that was wrong

Get out

He also didn't care for the life of his son.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_Dzhugashvili

>funded blm
>his family funded literal nazis
>in favor of globalist ideologies (inb4 hurr durr whats wrong with that)
>open borders
>supports """""""""""democracy""""""""""""" worldwide
>biggest supporter of """""""""open society"""""""" foundations

holy shit I've read some serial killer stories but this one might be the most sinister. Why isnt there a horror movie of people dying in a hotel full of traps and false doors, walls and stairs yet? setting it in a dark 19th century aesthetic would make it even worse

>For Germany he was anything but.
He was pretty much directly responsible for half of Germany getting cucked by the USSR for 40 years. Not to mention the deaths of millions of German soldiers and innocent German civilians. He may have envisioned himself as a savior of the German people, but he was also responsible for much of the harm that they suffered.

"Truly evil" does not mean "has no non-evil trait." It really just comes down to being more evil than good.

user, that's evil

>He was pretty much directly responsible for half of Germany getting cucked by the USSR for 40 years. Not to mention the deaths of millions of German soldiers and innocent German civilians.
Yes, but these weren't his intentions.

Albert Fish

BrinG bACk tHe mEmE

New phone who dis

Oliver Cromwell. Set up a puritan theocracy, killed starved and enslaved lots of people in Ireland, and sold England out to the Jews.

Who is Chairman Mao for 300 Alex?

Pic also kinda related. :/

This nigga.
I think abducting a child and then writing a letter to the mother on how he killed, cooked and ate her shows how he knew what he was doing and therefore knows how evil it is.

>globalism
>bad
"hurr durr globalist inb44444 it's not bad hurr" is not an argument

globalism is literally the inevitable fate of humanity

>globalism is literally the inevitable fate of humanity
>This means it's a good thing somehow

>the Jews

Disregarded post here.

No reason to suspect he ever met Joan.

Minor point, but still, let's erase that meme.

"The banality of evil."

The fucks that ran Unit 731.

Killing millions of people from behind a desk is easy mode.

Actually doing horrifying shit that would make 40k Chaos Marines blush with your own hands is another league.

always knew anno was a sick freak

>I'm pretty sure that anyone who did a bunch of horrible shit and then proclaimed that they were evil would be considered mentally ill no matter what.

Why though. Isn't it more sane to accept that you've done bad things than to rationalize them away as good deeds.

Your mom

Stalin, Mao, Lenin, Pol Pot etc

I feel like "evil" can essentially be boiled down to
>does horrible things
>knows they're doing horrible things
>unapologetic about doing said things

Of course that's still pretty broad, and "horrible things" is hugely varied based on the societal context, but I think it's a good baseline. Obviously everyone does things they know are bad and not everyone is "evil", but there's a certain threshold where lack of regard for the life of other humans seems irredeemable. That line is kinda hard to define, but I feel like full awareness and disregard for the reprehensibility of your actions could consider you to be evil.

But then you've got people who are called evil like Hitler who could just be called horrifically misguided, since they believe that their actions are ethically justified in their warped worldview, which likely arose due to tragedy in their life, so are they evil? Then there are others like Dahmer who are acting on their base animalistic urges and know that they are, but do it anyway. But if said urges are grounded in genetic and environmental influences beyond their control, can they be called evil? The idea of agency in actions is always called into question when mental illness is concerned, but at what point are genetics and upbringing allowed to be used as a hand wave for someone's actions? Why don't we apply the same idea to neurotypicals? And how do we define the neurotypical when such varied accepted behaviors across different societies exist? How can Dahmers actions simultaneously be used as a proof of his mental illness AND his mental illness itself an excuse for his behavior? Seems a bit circular.

Anyway I'm rambling now, and I don't know how to further this idea without devolving into the idea of determinism, which isn't the point of the thread, so I'll just leave it at that.

>>>>/Facebook/

Intention-wise Hitler still obviously takes the cake in front of them, you're just one layer in historiography you fucktard kys faggot

Lenin Trotsky and marxs did nothing wrong.

Fuck off newfag.

Trotsky didn't do much evil because he didn't get the chance to.

Marx genuinely thought he was doing well, but has led to the suffering of millions.

Julius Caesar
Constantine I
Muhammad
William the Bastard
Adolf Hitler
Angela Merkel

Jews

>someone who did harm, knew he was doing harm and knew that what he was doing was wrong.
Impossible

>globalism is literally the inevitable fate of humanity
The fate of the universe is heat death, doesn't make it good.

he said that to get attention...